Summer 2020

Which technology
is bestWireless standards for building
automation and control
8 Industry NewsThe latest news andviews on campus

26 Smart education
Maximise efﬁciency
in response to COVID

30 The Smart move
Why smart tech isright for electricians

42 Light of the museum
Lighting without a hardwired installation

COVER STORY

Which technology isbest?
A structured approach narrows down theoptions when choosing wireless standards forbuilding automation and control by Graham
Martin, Chairman & CEO EnOcean Alliance

Smart buildings are
becoming the “newnormal”, with increasinglysophisticated automationand control systems
that deliver cost savings, comfort,and convenience across theboard. From individual homes andmulti-occupancy buildings, througheducational and healthcare facilities, to workplaces and corporate
headquarters, enhanced building
automation solutions are deliveringvalue-added service features thanks
to linkage with IT-based systems andeven artiﬁcial intelligence.
Such possibilities rely ontransferring greater or lesser

4 | Summer 2020 | SMART AUTOMATION

amounts of data around buildings
and their interior spaces. The
requisite data are easily gathered
and transmitted wirelessly: butwhich wireless technologies andstandards are the most suitable?
And how do we go about identifying
the best solutions? Prof. Dr.
Michael Krodel from the Institut fürGebäudetechnologie (Institute ofBuilding Technology) in Ottobrunn,
Germany, has given some invaluable
insights.
It depends on the use case
In Krodel’s White Paper “SmartBuilding trends – a comparison ofwireless standards for automationand control” he says that the ﬁrst
step is to identify the processes orsystems that need to be automated.
The starting-point is to list therequirements for room-automationand facility automation on the onehand, against the requirements for“Smart Buildings“. The most suitablewireless technology can only beidentiﬁed, case by case, according to
the relevant application and its “usecases“.
Typical room-/buildingautomation use cases include
individual room temperature
regulation according to humanpresence and window status; room
ventilation and cooling depending

on air temperature, air quality (CO2and/or VOC loads) and humidity; andlighting, where illumination levels
can be dimmed when areas are notin use. In the latter, switches cancontrol individual lights or groups oflights as required.
Artiﬁcial light intensity can also
be adjusted in accordance withnatural light intensity dependingon the weather and time of day. Inaddition, sun blinds and shutterscan be deployed automatically todarken the room when it is warm or
let the sunshine in when the space iscool. With battery-free technology,
switches and dials for illuminationand external light shading can beplaced anywhere on partitions
or walls, according to users’
requirements and convenience.
Handheld remote controls can also
be employed.
Use cases for the home arecomplemented by an extensive list ofautomation scenarios spanning heatand cooling requirements energy
systems’ operation, management andfault reporting.
Smart ofﬁce buildings expand thepossibilities to many more use cases:from the smartphone-based dynamic
booking/release of conferenceroom facilities and workplaces inopen-plan ofﬁces, to optimal facility
management through occupancy

sensors. Meetings ﬁnishing ahead ofschedule and unoccupied workplaces
can be identiﬁed and adjustedaccordingly for optimal facility
management.
Further analysis of usage patterns
enables the ﬂexible allocation ofemployee workspace. Under-usedareas can be set to energy-saving
mode, thereby lowering the cost andworkload of heating, cooling andpower plant. A graphical displayof building occupancy – typicallyrendered as "Heat Maps" or "Moving
Trails" - provides for zone planningpurposes. This can be applied
to optimise workspace size andlocation; even to optimise individual
workspaces to users’ preferences.
As well as detecting people,
sensors within the building
automation network monitor pumps,
cleaning machines, HVAC systems,
lifts and more, then report any
malfunction in real time for better
fault-ﬁnding and more efﬁcient
preventative measures.
Categorising wireless standards andtheir suitability for automation andcontrol
With Prof. Dr. Krodel’s analysis,
the use cases are cross-referenced
with characteristics of the leading
candidates for radio-frequency datatransmission. In particular, wirelessnetwork standards are characterisedby the frequency bands in which
they operate, the power of theradio signal, and the protocols andmodulation schemes that they use.
Relevant criteria are as follows:• Suitability of the frequency band:the use cases considered, largely
feature small data packets (10-100bytes), latency times from 0.1 to1 second and a range from 10
to 100m. The suitability of thefrequency band is of decisive
importance – described as a “KOcriterion” or knockout factor. Anyfunctional limitation, even a partial
one, would disqualify the wirelessstandard in question for this type ofapplication.
• Manufacturer dependence: inthe best interests of the user,
wireless standards should beavailable from as many suppliers
as possible. In addition, wirelesstechnology should allow for
maximal interoperability between
technologies and devices produced
by different suppliers• Infrastructure: ideally, devices
should not require their own. Thisis a given when signals can betransmitted over greater distances
and is particularly relevant
when sensor network density islow. A better score is awarded

SMART AUTOMATION | Summer 2020 | 5

to infrastructure consisting ofcable-connected antennas andgateways, allowing for meshedcommunication.
• Integrability: wireless standards
should be widely supported
by multiple manufacturers ofcommercially available controllers
and gateways, with provenreference project information.
• Broad availability of the necessary
hardware components: all thenecessary sensors must be freely
available on the open market.
• Measurement and testing:appropriate fault-ﬁnding equipment
and user documentation should beavailable.
• Power supply: one of the main
advantages of wireless technology
consists of the free positioningof sensor devices. Cabled power
supplies represent barriers to therequired ﬂexibility. Ideally, sensorsshould be self-powered. Batterypowered devices sit in-between
these options, because of theneed for maintenance and thecosts – including environmental
cost – of replacement and disposal.
Low power consumption and long
lifetime are key considerations.
• Data encryption: data security andintegrity must be guaranteed by
6 | Summer 2020 | SMART AUTOMATION

encryption technology.
Losers and winners
Analysis based on the broad
matrix of use cases and technicalsuitability makes it clear that WideArea Networks are unsuitable forcurrent and future Smart Building
applications. The White Paper
concludes that WANs are “bettersuited to integrating wireless devices
into public areas, i.e. where it is
impossible to establish one’s own
infrastructure. In modern buildings,
however, setting up an own
infrastructure or establishing meshnetworks presents no problems
and makes excellent sense inconsideration of the density of thesensor networks.”
In contrast to WANs, local
area wireless technologies proveapplicable to Smart Building
automation, albeit to varying
degrees. Options to incorporate
wireless devices (especially sensors)
into building automation system
could be especially relevant, forexample alongside controllers anddirect digital control-systems.
The use-case analysis concludes
that support for speciﬁc wirelesstechnologies offered by controller
manufacturers plays an importantrole. There is huge merit tobeing able to source compatible
components on the open market.
Even greater advantages are offeredby wireless devices that do not
require batteries or mains power.
Two wireless technologies leadthe ﬁeld, as Krodel concludes that“… the EnOcean and Z-Wave wirelessstandards appear to be ideal foruse in “Smart Buildings“. EnOcean
achieved a mean score of 1.9 points
on the suitability index followed by
Z-Wave with 1.5 points. “
But the difference between thesefront-runners lies in their market
focus. Commercially, Z-Wave isbetter suited to “DIY“ Smart Home
consumer-level retroﬁt applications.
By contrast, EnOcean features higher
levels of interoperability and caters
for professionally installed integrated
systems, most typically in Smart
Home and non-residential building
sectors. Nevertheless, the EnOcean
Alliance is broadening its focus
and will have increasing appeal as
consumer-level home automation
spreads.
For further information please visit
www.enocean-alliance.org